Section 14 limitation exclusion may apply where a mistaken remedy was pursued with due care and good faith

Time spent in a prior civil revision may be excluded under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 where the earlier proceeding was pursued with due care and good faith, even if the remedy chosen was mistaken. The stated principle is that exclusion applies when the earlier forum could not entertain the matter because of a jurisdictional defect or a disability of like nature. The text also notes that following legal advice and lacking legal training supported good faith, and the subsequent suit under Order 21 Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was therefore not liable to be rejected as time-barred.

---

---

Issues: Whether the time spent in prosecuting a civil revision before the High Court could be excluded under Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 for a subsequent suit under Order 21 Rule 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and whether the earlier proceeding was prosecuted in good faith in a court unable to entertain it.

Analysis: Section 14 required due diligence, the same cause of action, prosecution in good faith, and inability of the earlier forum to entertain the proceeding because of defect of jurisdiction or another cause of like nature. The earlier objection proceedings under Order 21 Rules 97 to 103 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 showed that the executing court's summary order on obstruction was followed by a revision, but the proper remedy was a suit under Rule 103. The High Court, when entertaining the revision, could not finally determine the parties' rights on facts, so the revision was treated as having been pursued in a court suffering from a disability of the kind contemplated by Section 14. On good faith, the Court held that the litigant had acted with due care by following legal advice, was not legally trained, and had not been shown to have acted negligently or without attention.

Conclusion: Section 14 of the Indian Limitation Act, 1908 applied on the facts, the revision period was excludable, and the suit could not be rejected as time-barred.

Ratio Decidendi: For the purposes of Section 14, a litigant who prosecutes an earlier civil proceeding with due care and on legal advice may receive exclusion of time even if the chosen remedy was mistaken, provided the prior forum was unable to entertain the matter because of a jurisdictional disability or a disability of like nature.

---